I agree with the comments that others raised in this thread regarding the bizarre marketing angle they are taking.

Vista has a reputation of being a shoddy operating system (deserved or not) and by selling it as the cheap solution you open your self up to Linux on the bottom (free) while surrendering the prestige and quality title to Apple at the upper end; not that I expect to see Windows market share significantly dented, but it seems like a poor place to position one self.

Originally posted by sr105:It's the little things that keep me married to my mac. When I use a friend's PC, I miss a lot of mac's features such as the following.

1. Expose

Strangely, I rarely see Mac users using it and I personally can't stand it, but hey - that's fine.

quote:

2. Easy network location changes

Unless you're binding to an LDAP in which case it's a PITA

quote:

3. Quicksilver (yeah, not truly part of OS X, but if you use it, it feels that way)

There's a LOT that people add to their OSX that isn't part of the OS but it ends up feeling like it. Strangely, I add almost nothing to Windows and it's fine, but I have to add quite a bit to OSX to make it feel okay. Kinda like WoW - you almost HAVE to use addons to make it playable. . . hmmmm.

quote:

4. Bluetooth (easy setup, file transfer)

Same on Windows, btw. Plugged, bound, and played.

quote:

5. Plugging in a new secondary monitor (like a conf. room projector) and having the mac "just work"

REALLY? No - sorry. Maybe a secondary monitor (although one beef I have is that unless I want to pay BIG moolah, I can only use 2 (I use 3 at home and 4 at work)) but unless you've got your dongle, you can't plug in to a VAST majority of projectors at conference rooms since they use VGA. . . and you'll need one of a variety of dongles for Macs to plug in.

BTW - my 3 and 4 monitor setups on Windows? Plugged in the second video card, plugged in the monitors, and selected "Extend my desktop to this monitor" and lo and behold, I'm running them all. No huhu.

quote:

6. Accessibility Zoom (Cmd_Opt_+/-)

And. . . Windows has that too

quote:

7. Spaces

You got Windows there - although I know very few Mac users who use it.

Oh - wait, there's a Windows Power Toy, from MS, which gives you the same thing: Virtual Desktop Manager. Been around for a looong time (I used it on Win98).

quote:

8. Stability

Find a new tune please. I've rebooted my Mac more than I have my XP system.

quote:

9. Not having to search through levels of windows to change a System/Program Preference.

Which system are you talking about? Really. . . all Control Panels are in the same place, which you cannot say about Mac.

12. iSync -- being able to grab everything from #10 and put it on my Sony Ericsson phone.

Again - bundling? However, that being said, there's PLENTY of sync programs available on Windows.

quote:

13. Print to PDF built in

Which is in Win7. I just use CutePDF - a little addon, but it's little and it works GREAT. BTW - I also use Foxit and consider it LIGHTYEARS better than Mac's Preview for viewing PDFs.

quote:

14. Everything Bonjour/Zeroconf related that "just appears and works"... and the list could go on and on with other people's contributions ...

I don't hate Windows. In fact, I like XP and I've found the improvements to 7 to be very cool. *But*, for me at least, windows has a long way to go in the "little things" department. Windows 7's feature list shows that someone at MS finally "gets" why people like Macs. People who develop for macs actually think about usability if only for a second.

I'll tell ya, you don't seem to like XP or really even know a whole lot about Windows.

I'll admit to not being a Mac guy. I've got one but don't find it very usable (even with a big screen, I get frustrated without my multiple monitors. . .) and since I read faster than I look at icons (how do you alphabetize icons???) I have to use plugins to get my menus which now feels tacked on.

Honestly, it's Apples and oranges - if you prefer one, you prefer it. But don't go making nonsensical lists like this unless you want someone to EASILY come by and poke holes in it.

1. Why is the Mac "charged" with purchasing MS-Office and the Windows machine isn't? The Windows machine doesn't come with Office, and even if the user already has a Windows machine with Office, it's likely to be an OEM version that can't be legally transferred to the new machine (if the user even received the install CD), or it's an old version and they'll buy a new one. Oh, by the way, MS-Office Home and Student is $79 at Newegg (since the author likes using the lowest pricing he can find for all the Windows add-ons).

2. The author gratuitously includes Apple's One to One care, but doesn't include anything similar for the PC.

3. He includes "other software" for the Mac, but doesn't include anti-virus, backup, or "other software" for the PC.

4. He prices most Mac items from the Apple Store, but uses NewEgg and Amazon for the PC add-ons.

5. He doesn't include any OS upgrades for either system. Ignoring for now that OS X is roughly equivalent to XP Pro/Vista Business/Vista Ultimate, not the Vista Home Premium included with the Dell and HP, the fact is that most users are going to upgrade from Vista to Windows 7 as soon as possible because Vista is a resource hog. Upgrades will be at least $129 per machine. Mac OS X upgrades are $129 for one machine, $199 for up to 5 machines.

6. iLife and iWork upgrades can also be purchased as a family pack for up to 5 machines for less than the cost of purchasing 2 upgrades. That's not true for most Windows software, Office Home and Student is an exception in that it allows you to install on up to 3 machines.

Bottom line, it's a terrible piece of work that deliberately distorts the comparison in favor of their intended result. Had they done an unbiased comparison (excluding support costs), the Windows machine would still have been less expensive and they would have made their point, but instead they tried to pad the numbers and end up making themselves and the author look like complete idiots.

Lesson, Microsoft can't be trusted, they will distort whatever they have to in order to convince you of their superiority. BTW, that doesn't imply the Apple can be trusted.

Strangely, I rarely see Mac users using it and I personally can't stand it, but hey - that's fine.

I didn't use it when it first came out, but once you start using it, you realize how easy it makes it to find another window. It's just easier than hunting through the taskbar. I like the new features that address this in Win7.

9. Not having to search through levels of windows to change a System/Program Preference.

quote:

Which system are you talking about? Really. . . all Control Panels are in the same place, which you cannot say about Mac.

System Preferences.appLast time I checked, it's really hard to get to the network adapter settings in Vista/7. Try doing a DHCP "Repair" in Win7 without using the command line. Most of my use of Windows tends to be helping relatives and 90% of the time, the problem is an internet/network problem. That's why I focus so much on the network settings.

Oh so you WANT Microsoft to Bundle everything together? I thought MS was EVIL for doing that???

I never said that, and I think it's crap to criticize MS for bundling mostly because I've seen how well it can work (on my Mac). The other part of it is that 3rd party apps on my Mac use my calendar, address book, etc. I've never seen that on Windows. It's a real shame. People just want things to work. I remember that Windows used to come with a Contacts/Addressbook application, but it integrated with nothing else, so there wasn't much of a point to it.

11. Ability to move the mouse pointer within 2 seconds of waking my laptop from sleep.

quote:

2 seconds isn't gonna happen on a Mac either. . .

It does actually. My 6 yr old power book can still do it. My old roommate, a serial Thinkpad owner used that fact to answer someone's question about why my powerbook was more expensive. He took his brand new laptop and my 2 yr old powerbook, put them both to sleep, then woke them up to show how the mac was usable almost instantaneously while the Thinkpad took an order of magnitude longer. Try it. Go to an apple store, close the lid on a mac laptop putting it to sleep (wait for the pulsing light), open the lid, and move the pointer with the trackpad to see how quickly it comes back.

quote:

you DO password protect your laptop, right?)

No, I don't, but I should.

quote:

there's PLENTY of sync programs available on Windows.

The PLENTY is the problem. They're all different. I'll bet none of them work together. In the past, they all would have had their own addressbooks. Now, they probably integrate with Outlook which is expensive (but necessary IMO if you have a PC). Why can't MS just have a system addressbook per user that is used by Outlook?

13. Print to PDF built in

quote:

Which is in Win7. I just use CutePDF - a little addon, but it's little and it works GREAT. BTW - I also use Foxit and consider it LIGHTYEARS better than Mac's Preview for viewing PDFs.

I use both of those as well; both are excellent.

The over-arching point is that Apple actually thinks about how to make it's computers "just work" for their users. They go further by exposing that interoperability through programming interfaces that tons of 3rd-party apps can and do use.

I think Windows 7 is making strides in that direction and all of this is good for end-users.

quote:

I'll tell ya, you don't seem to like XP or really even know a whole lot about Windows.

I appreciated your comments about features I was unaware of.

quote:

and since I read faster than I look at icons (how do you alphabetize icons???) I have to use plugins to get my menus which now feels tacked on.

I don't follow. I use list mode for all of my Finder windows. I dislike icon views as well, unless I'm dealing with a folder full of pictures.

quote:

Honestly, it's Apples and oranges - if you prefer one, you prefer it. But don't go making nonsensical lists like this unless you want someone to EASILY come by and poke holes in it.

It just comes down to thinking about what users want and how to make it easier/better/faster. I just wish MS would take to heart the whole "There's no step 3" philosophy.

BTW There's no reason for vitriol. I'm not trying to trash talk windows. I've made similar lists of features missing from my Mac that are found easily in Windows like the ability to easily print photos (in different formats) from an explorer window or the Filmstrip mode (which mac finally has via coverflow which I dislike, but whatever).

I have been in the industry for 26 years now; the majority of that has been on various flavors of Windows. This so called report is just plain ridiculous but is somewhat expected after the "impartial" TCO report Microsoft had produced against Linux usage in the enterprise server space. This hatchet job of mixing certain facts, while disregarding other ones that would neutralize the other is just yellow journalism plain and simple. I think a true TCO analysis of both systems would take a bit more than 3 PDF pages; include many more factors, good quantitative analysis and less implied factors/costs. Another salvo to the reports credibility comes when you visit the authors website. It looks like something a 12 year old would have made back in 1995, I'm not saying it has to be on par with the Adobe website but this is just painful to look at.

In my house I have about every kind of machine and OS imaginable, heating is not an issue when they are all kicked on. I use to do computer support when I was attending university and we had some Macs (System 7). I hated supporting them and never used them (I don't have a very good reason outside of it was different and I never used them myself). Last year I was in the market for a new laptop to replace my aging windows laptop. After careful analysis of the actual system performance specs (not just the hardware specs) I found the MacBook Pro to be one of the better performers and at a lower price than some of the other alternatives (Alienware, high-end HP, etc...). I was very hesitant to make the change given my previous dislike of the Mac but decided to go for it as I could always just use it as a Windows only system. Well I am very glad I made the switch as I have had many positive outcomes from the migration.

The default set of applications on the Mac seem much more useful and functional than Windows equivalents (Safari Browser very fast, iMovie very nice, Front Row, etc..). Software licensing for Apple applications are cheaper and more flexible than the Microsoft equivalents (iWork suite $79 for a single seat or $99 for 5 seats vs. $339 for MS Office). Continuity of development; much of my work is on Linux based servers so it is nice to have this similarity in a development environment and eliminates the need to alter code like in instances where one has to work with the file system. I found that I am actually getting work done at a faster rate, which I thought had to just be a mental thing but was proven through review of my billing software. Through VMs I also now have a one stop shop for all my application testing needs, which is about the only time I use Windows on this computer.

I will not be getting rid of my Linux server anytime soon as it is still doing its job and has quite a bit of useful life left in it. Windows is pretty much relegated to a VM instance now for me, although I do have some systems with only it still around (would anyone like a deal? Oh thats right the resale sucks...) I would probably say the next time I am in the market for a system whether it be a laptop, desktop, server, etc...I will most likely be getting a Mac again. All of the pluses of Linux with a better wrapper and management tools.

"Previous versions of Windows such as XP and Vista have been widely criticized for not incorporating full-featured accessibility tools available in other operating systems such as Mac OS X and some Linux variants."

I was wondering about your assertion that zoom was in Windows as I figured it was there but so much blasted work to figure it out the first time why bother unless you are really disabled. I actually use it on the Mac...

>>Ref Stability - >>>>Find a new tune please. I've rebooted my Mac more than I have my XP >>>>system.I would like to know what the heck you are doing then; just as with Linux you can kill the process and all is well. Windows is the one the integrates the processes so tightly with the kernel that it brings everything down with it.

>>Ref Not having to search through levels of windows to change a System/Program >>Preference. >>>>Which system are you talking about? Really. . . all Control Panels are in the same>>>>place, which you cannot say about Mac.Wgere can you not say that about the Mac that you can on Windows?

>>Ref Having mail, calendar, address book, chat, ..., >>and other programs integrated together. >>>>Oh so you WANT Microsoft to Bundle everything together? I thought MS was EVIL for >>>>doing that???Unlike Windows these are built off of open technologies with good standards that anyone can build to. Windows is just now coming back around to the W3 web standard after years of screwing everything up with their nonstandard garbage. Also Windows does already package these apps with their OS it's just that they are so bad you pretty much have to buy the Office to do anythings $$$

>>Ref Ability to move the mouse pointer within 2 seconds of waking my laptop from sleep. >>>>Hmmm. Aside from password protecting my old Dell X1 (running Win7), it's pretty >>>>snappy. Of course, 2 seconds isn't gonna happen on a Mac either. . .but hey, even >>>>Intel dreams of that. My 4 year old Dell X1 just took 15 seconds (barring the time I >>>>took to type in my password. . .you DO password protect your laptop, right?)The term waking vs. boot is important here and it is around 2 seconds on the Mac for a wake. Windows, not so much...

Steve Jobs and Steve Ballmer are sitting around watching TV when one of those shows about ordinary people doing silly things comes on. They see a guy driving nails in to a pine board using nothing but his hand. Steve Jobs calls the guy and asks him how in the world did he come up with this crazy idea. Steve Ballmer also calls the guy to see if he would be interested in starting a contracting business...

>>I'll tell ya, you don't seem to like XP or really even know a whole lot about Windows.

Well the premise to this statement seems counter to the entire objective of the modern general-purpose computer much less the vast majority of users of computer. Who really wants to know about Windows, Mac, Linux? Theses computers are only tools, a means to an end with the product of their work being the only things of value. That said, the most transparent system to the user is king i.e. the one you have to know the least about but still get your work done.

Qualifiers like "it could do..." or "you could just add..." or "if you go and change..." end up just being inefficiencies and obstacles to true user productivity. I am not married to either platform just to the fact I have work to do and the shortest point between A and B is what I will take. Today for all the work I do the Mac is the better platform; tomorrow who knows... I would also add the strong market growth with Apple tends to point to the fact they have a superior product at this time as supported by the concepts in "The Wisdom of Crowds" and related theory.

>>Ref Expose>>>>Strangely, I rarely see Mac users using it and I personally can't stand it, but hey ->>>>that's fine.

First, I love Expose and I use it all the time. Hearing someone say they can't stand it is like hearing someone say they hate like chocolate, sunny days or puppies. Sure you may not use it but to say you can't stand it, come on. What is the more clever alternative on the Windows side, the application bar stacking scheme, cascade, tile?

I always just preferred to have everything I'm doing listed so I don't have to hit a key, have everything displayed, and then have to look for it. Again - it's the look for vs. listed out.

It's the same as the Icon - the Dock is icon-based so even when I have something like AppMenuBoy on there, I still have to figure out which it is, then right-click in order to get my menu. Using list view is inferior (imho) to Detail View in Windows.

In any case, sorry for the perceived vitriol - I speak tongue-in-cheek and it doesn't come out in print very well and I forget to turn it off now and again.

But bundling is something I don't actually like - even in Windows. What happens is that the maker gets protective of its things and starts acting like it - look at the iPhone and how protective Apple is of its products - no competition is allowed. MS bundles certain products (which does, in fact, include a calendar, contact, and email program - basic and nobody uses it because Office takes over those functions) and gets in trouble for it even when other programs can easily take over the defaults - FF, T-Bird, etc.

The parallel would be if MS bundled Outlook with Windows. People would scream - but they don't with Apple bundling Mail, et al, with OSX.

I used to not password my laptop until my roommate thought it would be funny to mess with my desktop. . . forgetting that it is a work machine. . . yeah.

Overall - I'll agree with you to a certain point, that Apple actually thinks about how to make its computers "just work."

I rather think, however, that they look to see how some people do things and model their processes around that, specifically, and then tell people that THIS is the way to work. I don't really find much flexibility in how to do things with Mac - you work in such a way or it bends you to its will.

Granted, you get that with Windows, but its way of doing things (hierarchical menus, slide-show, and extremely easy and vast application base for utilities) feels like it allows me to work in my way.

Plus I get 4 monitors. Woo!

BTW - 2 clicks to my network adapter from Win7. From the desktop. R-Click on the adapter in the sys-tray, choose Network and Sharing Center, Choose Change Adapter Settings and you're at the list of network adapters (Wireless, Wired, and 1394) - one more than with Mac, but still pretty good.

Originally posted by garmisch:>>Ref Expose>>>>Strangely, I rarely see Mac users using it and I personally can't stand it, but hey ->>>>that's fine.

First, I love Expose and I use it all the time. Hearing someone say they can't stand it is like hearing someone say they hate like chocolate, sunny days or puppies. Sure you may not use it but to say you can't stand it, come on. What is the more clever alternative on the Windows side, the application bar stacking scheme, cascade, tile?

I work in a lab and about half my employees use Macs. We're a 40% Mac campus and as I'm the sole student tech support person, I see a huge number of computers come through my place.

Personally, I hate it. Yes it's anecdotal - I dislike looking through a jumbled mass of windows (I tend to have 10-15 things open at the same time) as opposed to looking at the task bar and seeing everything I've got going. Taskbar seems more orderly to me.

But in any case, I watch what people do - all the time. I also talk to them about what they do and don't do and I ask questions.

My statement was about what I see people do - note the primary statement: "I rarely see Mac users using it" - that was the primary. I tossed the secondary in there for flavor.

But you're welcome to use the secondary as primary all you want.

Your statement that a computer is a general purpose device - I agree completely. I like my computers to be able to do whatever I want - and I don't feel like my Mac can do that without futzing around with it - whereas everything I need to do with my Windows machine is only a few clicks away, and easily found via an alphabetized list.

Now, Spotlight is friggin AWESOME - I wish that Windows had something as unintrusive as that (indexing is a pain and sux resources) but they're getting better. Win7 does a pretty good job with it.

But for general purpose things - I feel like I'm bending the Mac to my will whereas the Windows machine just feels like a toolbox with various screwdrivers, hammers, saws, and wrenches in it. . .

BTW, Garmisch - it's easy to kill processes on a Windows machine - bring up the task manager, go to Processes, right click and select Kill Process Tree and you're golden. If you're only looking at your processes, you're probably going to be just fine - if you look at ALL, and you do that to a few of them, you'll stand the chance of an immediate reboot (which is always fun to do to people! LOL)

Again, it's the difference between being given certain things you can do (Apple - and trying to kill my Disk Utility - which will NOT go away) or being given access to the spectrum and asked what I want to do (please stop this process and all that go with it. . . and Adobe Acrobat dies (DIE I tell you DIE!!!) as does its unholy children)

Remember the old video? "I don't feel like I'm operating the Mac so much as I'm just there sharing the Mac experience."

Originally posted by SoCalBoomer:Strangely, I rarely see Mac users using it and I personally can't stand it, but hey - that's fine.

Exposé is great for window management.

quote:

Unless you're binding to an LDAP in which case it's a PITA

You're confused. Or is it me? How does changing network locations relate to LDAP?

quote:

Same on Windows, btw. Plugged, bound, and played.

Bluetooth on Windows? Definitely not reliably plug-and-play. And, even at the best of times, you end up doing Windows infamous Dialog Dance. It goes something like this: A "balloon" pops up, with a sound, confirming that it recognized the device. Another pops up soon afterwards, stating what kind of device it is. Then it pops up yet another balloon with the proper name of the device. Finally--if you're lucky--a balloon pops up to let you know the device is ready.

Comically stupid and irritating.

quote:

And. . . Windows has that too

No, Windows does not have fullscreen, system-wide zoom. It's not Magnifier, SoCalBoomer.

quote:

You got Windows there - although I know very few Mac users who use it.

I use Spaces. Too bad Windows doesn't build-in the same functionality.

quote:

Really. . . all Control Panels are in the same place, which you cannot say about Mac.

Yes, you can. All System settings are in one place: System Preferences. Try a Mac sometime--I think you'll like it.

quote:

Oh so you WANT Microsoft to Bundle everything together? I thought MS was EVIL for doing that???

He's not referring to bundling; he's referring to integration. Sheesh...

quote:

Of course, 2 seconds isn't gonna happen on a Mac either

Of course, it does happen on a Mac. That's the way it works--and always has. Near-instant wake-up.

quote:

there's PLENTY of sync programs available on Windows.

I'm sure there are. iSync is built-in to Mac OS X.

quote:

I just use CutePDF - a little addon, but it's little and it works GREAT.

Hmm...that plus a PS2PDF converter such as Ghostscript will get you print-to-pdf functionality that works most of the time. It's not the same as Mac OS X's built-in system-wide PDF generation with integrated, extendible workflow.

quote:

BTW - I also use Foxit and consider it LIGHTYEARS better than Mac's Preview for viewing PDFs.

Interesting. In what ways is it "LIGHTYEARS better" better than Preview?

quote:

since I read faster than I look at icons (how do you alphabetize icons???) I have to use plugins to get my menus which now feels tacked on.

Huh?

quote:

Honestly, it's Apples and oranges - if you prefer one, you prefer it. But don't go making nonsensical lists like this unless you want someone to EASILY come by and poke holes in it.

I don't think you "EASILY" poked holes in his list. I'm not sure you poked holes in it at all.

I'm with you on detailed vs. list view and love the Apple implementation of the space bar quick view on files (it kills the XP/Vista explorer window version).

I do think the Apple is just as flexible but can see how it might be seen as rigid in certain areas but I find the rigidity actually corrects bad behavior I have picked-up after years of "freedom" on the Windows system e.g. the way I arrange my document, applications, etc...

Passwords, yes a good thing...everyone please use them. That said the security implementation is better with Linux/BSD/OSX model than with Windows, which has strapped it on as an after thought rather that an original design specification. They have made great improvements to it though but in Vista those improvements became an annoyance too.

Spotlight is rather nice; it is one of those things I did not even consider in my buying evaluation after only having the dreadful MS Find process that did little more than slow your machine down. However, now I wonder what I did before I had it.

I am very familiar with the Windows task manager (as most people who use Windows will become) and yes you can cut an application that goes crazy. My main assertion was the fact that MS has modeled there OS with things like explorer.exe, COM, DCOM, iNet, etc... that are tied directly to the core OS in an attempt to improve user experience. However, this has also affected overall stability and security. Application that are too tightly intertwined with the OS bring the whole thing down with it. It use to be a BSOD but they have improved it one step to a few screen shutters and your app bar refreshes to have nothing available as if you just booted your system. Also the COM, DCOM and iNet facilities I mentioned before are one of the leading attack vectors for Windows due to their nebulous at best controls on these processes. On the Mac you can kill your own started processes easy enough but just as with Linux the user rights model can obfuscate/inhibit your ability to do so to others. This is an overall plus in my book as it is function of the security model so I wear it like a warm blanket and just deal with it in the proper manner. One last thing, Windows has been trying to reduce the reboot cycle for system changes but they still have a long way to go to catch up with Linux or Mac in that department. I have not had much exposure to Windows 7 yet but lets not forget Snow Leopard (true 64bit) will be out this summer too. If the pricing model remains the same i.e. $129 for a single seat or $199 for 5 seats that is going to make me smile all the way to the bank.

Oh so you WANT Microsoft to Bundle everything together? I thought MS was EVIL for doing that???

FYI Integration, is not bundling. They are tightly integrated because the one program can get the other programs data, and even more beneficial, there are programing API's so third parties can easily access the data as well. (for example you can use thunderbird for mail and it can access apple's address book) You can also easily export your data to another program. Microsoft's cal, address, and mail are all proprietary and "bundled" into outlook. I have quite a few programs that make it easy to move my data from Microsoft's clutches, but apples built export function takes me strait to ics, vcard, and mbox - standards goodness.

what functions do you find easier to do on your windows machine? I'm just curious.

Originally posted by heartburnkid:Wow, you must have gotten an incredible volume discount, because I don't think there's anybody on Earth who would argue that a Mac is actually CHEAPER than an equivalent PC.

The problem with this biased sort of crap is it fails to address real issues, like the lack of reliability of windows software, compatibility issues with vendor's hardware because of insufficient testing, and maintenance costs of time spent by the user trying to get things to work. Then there are other real issues like migration costs for example. If I buy a new laptop, the cost of reinstalling my software are astronomical because at my current billing rate of $1500/day, if I spend a day reinstalling my software (and having to phone MS to allow me to install my office on a new machine because I've used up the old installs on my old hardware), this adds a massive amount to my cost of a PC. With my migration using migration assistant, the process took 3 hours while I was out for the evening all my software worked flawlessly afterwards. My last PC migration took more than 2 days.

Then if I look at issues I had when my network settings were changed by a MS update and then failed to work, thats another day of billable time lost while I had to rectify an issue the local network guys couldn't, uninstalling and reinstalling network drivers. Then there was the time I downloaded the latest version of explorer and had it mess up my machine. One day wasted and I had to restore a backup.

The overall cost of running mac more expensive? I think not. Mac has been way cheaper for me, and that was with buying windows replacements for software I was using like Omnigraffle to replace Visio and Merlin to replace MS Project.

It's a religious argument and both sides are always right (until Armageddon . . . THEN you'll see, THEN you'll see! LOL)

deasys - I could go through your statements one by one - but you didn't actually read mine with a critical eye so I won't. For example - LDAP is not the relevant word in my statement, BINDING is. We're having all sorts of issues with our bound macs no longer authenticating correctly and nobody, not even Apple, has an answer. Of course, you can be pat and say it's the LDAP's fault. . .if you want. . .and I can laugh and give you another little kernel of info.

But no big deal - this is only a forum. You're only a Mac apologist. And I DO have a Mac (running 10.5) on the left side of my desk (strangely appropriate, no? ) with my quad monitor Windows machine on the right. I'll stick with looking at both machines when I write stuff comparing both machines. You stick to looking at just your Mac.

@Garmisch - for individuals and families, yeah, the licensing model is excellent! It really is. Of course, you really need to keep upgrading every year or so to keep up with the Mac experience. . . and I'm still betting that Snow Leopard is not going to be much more than what XP SP2 was to XP. . . but we'll see and we'll argue about that when it comes out.

But where it hits me is that academic licensing - the larger scale licensing. It's one reason why Macs are still very much in the minority in my labs - they will not be flexible with their licensing. Locking us in to the same number of clients for three years? THREE years? Seriously, Apple, come on.

@Nathan - Strangely, Microsoft tried to use that very argument. They weren't "bundling" - they were "integrating" in order to improve the overall user experience. That was shot down. From AppleXnet - "First off, it needs to be pointed out that Apple does indeed do what Microsoft does: Apple bundles applications with the operating system, it integrates its web browser and media player into the operating system, and the operating system would not be able to function correctly without it." 12-19-2003, AppleXnet.com

Now note, this is an example of integrating and bundling being used in the same breath for pretty much the same thing. I realize that technically, they are different - but the anti-trust suit merged the two words into the same thing, colloquially speaking - and on forums like this, I speak colloquially.

The fact remains, we argue against Microsoft's integration of Internet Explorer, only, with Windows and yet we laud Apple's integration of just about everything with OSX. Heck, Quicktime is integrated; fontbook, Mail, iChat . . .

All of these are bundled at least (i.e. installed by default) and integrated into the operating system to one degree or another. I'm not saying it's bad - I'm saying it's hypocritical to applaud Apple's practice while decrying Microsoft's.

As to what I find easier on Windows? Just general usage, to be honest. As I've mentioned, I use 4 monitors at work and 3 at home - I can't do that on a reasonably priced Apple; and I DO find my productivity to drop, measurably, with fewer monitors (had a student in Org Psych do a study and she claimed it was measurable - I just claimed it was miserable . . . pun! WOO - damn, need coffee).

@MissionMan - and it fails to address the lack of reliability of ANY system. NO system we have is foolproof. My Mac is still sitting there unable to Force Quit Disk Utility - and I've tried. Going to restart in just a minute. Must finish typing this first.

Apple gets away with "more stable" software because they're the only friggin vendor for the main part of it. That's also a weakness for hobbyists like me. I LIKE putting a second video card in my computer so I can use an obscene number of monitors. I can't do that with any Apple short of the Mac Pro and I can't afford that.

Overall cost of running Macs? When they're not bound to a network and have to deal with that type of thing?

Not as cheap as you might think. We have spent FAR more time trying to get our Macs to print to authenticated servers; to bind properly to our LDAP; to connect with our BlueArc 40TB array nicely than we have with ANY of our other systems, and they still don't work right. The Director of our IS group is a huge Mac guy and he spends a significant amount of time troubleshooting Mac issues at the server end (Nix servers, btw - Linux LDAP, Linus print server, etc. - well, the BlueArc isn't, but that's a different story. . .)

Originally posted by Banquo:Microsoft should also mention the main reason why many of us wouldn`t touch a Mac with a ten foot pole. Lack of choice in hardware and the inability to do any meaningful upgrades.Once you buy a Mac, you`re basically stuck with what came out of the box.

I added a new HD and RAM to my MBP. I can do many other amazing things such as fill my own gas tank and make toast.

Originally posted by Banquo:Microsoft should also mention the main reason why many of us wouldn`t touch a Mac with a ten foot pole. Lack of choice in hardware and the inability to do any meaningful upgrades.Once you buy a Mac, you`re basically stuck with what came out of the box.

I added a new HD and RAM to my MBP. I can do many other amazing things such as fill my own gas tank and make toast.

It's a religious argument and both sides are always right (until Armageddon . . . THEN you'll see, THEN you'll see! LOL)

@Nathan - Strangely, Microsoft tried to use that very argument. They weren't "bundling" - they were "integrating" in order to improve the overall user experience. That was shot down. From AppleXnet - "First off, it needs to be pointed out that Apple does indeed do what Microsoft does: Apple bundles applications with the operating system, it integrates its web browser and media player into the operating system, and the operating system would not be able to function correctly without it." 12-19-2003, AppleXnet.com

Now note, this is an example of integrating and bundling being used in the same breath for pretty much the same thing. I realize that technically, they are different - but the anti-trust suit merged the two words into the same thing, colloquially speaking - and on forums like this, I speak colloquially.

Let's be honest; it wasn't the integration of IE that was the problem. If you followed the antitrust suit you know that it was withholding OS licenses from IBM (for developing OS/2) and Compaq (for bundling Netscape) that was the problem. Unbundling/restrictions was the solution for that problem.

quote:

The fact remains, we argue against Microsoft's integration of Internet Explorer, only, with Windows and yet we laud Apple's integration of just about everything with OSX. Heck, Quicktime is integrated; fontbook, Mail, iChat . . .

Because Apple doesn't do anticompetitive behaviors (for the most part) in order to make QuickTime, Mail, iChat, or Safari "dominant". They don't try to snuff out FireFox, Thunderbird, etc, etc (though as an exception they appear to be doing so on the iPhone).

quote:

All of these are bundled at least (i.e. installed by default) and integrated into the operating system to one degree or another. I'm not saying it's bad - I'm saying it's hypocritical to applaud Apple's practice while decrying Microsoft's.

Microsoft has used their tactics as weapons: Use IE, unbundle FireFox, or we withhold Windows. Stop developing OS/2 or we withhold Windows.

Apple's closest behavior would be not allowing competing software on the iPhone, and even then they don't act punitively, they just refuse to publish the software.